Most valuation reports are read by someone whose interests run against yours: a lender’s credit committee, a CRA reviewer, opposing counsel, a buyer’s accountant. The work here is built for that reader first.
The purpose drives everything: the standard of value, the level of report, the amount of diligence, and the fee. It is the first thing we settle.
A comprehensive report costs several times a calculation report. Buying more assurance than the situation requires is one of the commonest ways owners waste money.
The lowest level of assurance, based on limited review and analysis. Appropriate for internal planning, a first look at a transaction, and many lender requirements. The working range for most owner-managed engagements.
A middle level, with more corroboration of the key assumptions. Common where the number will be negotiated between parties who are not in open dispute, such as a planned shareholder buyout or an estate freeze of some size.
The highest level of assurance and the most extensive diligence. Reserved for matters heading to court or to a hostile negotiation, where the conclusion will be attacked line by line and the valuator may testify.
Reports are prepared under CBV Institute Standards of Practice. Advisory work such as value-driver analysis and planning ranges is distinct from a conclusion of value and is identified as such in the engagement letter. If a matter is heading to litigation or to the CRA, that is settled before the work begins, not afterwards.
Every engagement is quoted as a fixed fee against a fixed scope, set out in the engagement letter before any work starts. If the scope changes because the situation changes, we agree the revision in writing first.
I do not quote a fee before understanding the purpose, because the purpose determines the level of report, and the level of report determines most of the cost. That is what the first call is for.
What I will say plainly: this practice is not the cheapest option in Ontario, and it is not trying to be. Anyone can now produce a document with a number in it. The fee here buys the judgment behind the number and the willingness to stand behind it under scrutiny.
